[oa335]

> Evolving resistance comes at a cost for bacteria and over time they might loose resistance against previous antibiotics.

This is known as the "ecological fallacy".

> reversion to sensitivity is neither an immediate nor necessary outcome of selection simply because a resistant pathogen is no longer in an antibiotic-laden environment [1]

[1] "Why Do Antibiotics Exist" - https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/mBio.01966-21

[Fomite]

...that is not how I've ever heard "the ecological fallacy" used, and this is what I do for a living.

[oa335]

What is your line of work and how is concept of “the ecological fallacy” used there?

[Fomite]

Epidemiology and disease ecology, particularly of antimicrobial resistant pathogens.

The Wikipedia entry for it gives the definition I've always seen: "An ecological fallacy is a formal fallacy in the interpretation of statistical data that occurs when inferences about the nature of individuals are deduced from inferences about the group to which those individuals belong."

[oa335]

My mistake, this is not an example of “ecological fallacy”, but instead a line of reasoning that explains the assumptions that led to an “ecological fallacy” type of error.